Delhi High Court
P K Suresh vs Ashcon Builders (P) Ltd And Ors on 7 May, 2015
$~12.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 2423/2013
P K SURESH ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Alex Joseph, Advocate
versus
ASHCON BUILDERS (P) LTD AND ORS ..... Defendants
Through: Ms. Rajitha T., Advocate for Mr. Tom
Joseph, Advocate with D-3 in person with
Mr. Vincent M.K.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
ORDER
% 07.05.2015
1. On the last date of hearing, when the suit was placed before the
Court for framing of issues, upon perusing the pleadings and hearing
the submissions made by the counsels for the parties, it was deemed
appropriate to direct the presence of the defendant No.2, for recording
his statement under Order X Rule 2 CPC.
2. The defendant No.2 is absent today. However, the defendant
No.3 is present and hands over a copy of the Resolution dated
25.04.2015 passed by the Board of Directors of the defendant
No.1/company, authorising him to appear on behalf of the company
and take all necessary steps including filing affidavits, giving
statements etc. before the Court to settle, mediate and enter into a
compromise in the present suit.
3. When the matter was taken up on the first call, the Court had
started by posing some questions to the defendant No.3, for
clarification of the averments made in the written statement.
However, the defendant No.3 had stated that he was not well
conversant with english language and had requested that he be given
the assistance of Mr. Vincent M.K., the Project Manager of the
defendant No.1/company, who was present in Court. Permission as
requested was granted. Mr. Vincent M.K. had translated into
vernacular some of the queries raised on the defendant No.3, but half
way through the said interaction, at the request of the counsels for the
parties, the matter was passed over to enable the parties to interact
with each other directly and negotiate a settlement.
4. On the second call, the defendant No.3 states that the
defendants are willing to execute a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff
in respect of the suit premises, i.e., Flat No.UG-3, Tower A1 Block,
Upper Ground Floor, comprised in Khasra No.177, Plot No.KIZ - 509A,
measuring 630 sq. feet with one car parking with roof rights of the
said property, situated in Palam Village, New Delhi.
5. Counsels for the parties state that as per the Agreement to Sell
dated 04.05.2013 executed between the parties, they had agreed
that the total sale consideration for the suit premises would be
`23,75,000/-. It is agreed that out of the said amount, the plaintiff
had paid a sum of `15 lacs to the defendants as part sale
consideration. Counsel for the plaintiff clarifies that the balance
amount of `8,75,000/- was deposited by the plaintiff in the Registry,
in terms of the order dated 06.12.2013.
6. Counsel for the defendant No.3 states on instructions that it will
take upto three months for the defendants to execute the sale deed in
favour of the plaintiff. It is agreed by the parties that the balance sale
consideration lying deposited in the Registry shall be released in
favour of the defendants immediately upon a copy of the registered
sale deed being placed on record.
7. In view of the aforesaid submission, with the consent of the
parties, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the
defendants who are directed to execute a sale deed in favour of the
plaintiff in respect of the suit property, within three months from
today. Immediately upon execution of the sale deed, the defendants
shall approach the Court for seeking release of the balance sale
consideration of `8,75,000/-, alongwith the interest, if any, accrued
thereon.
8. The parties shall affix their signatures on the margin of the order
sheet in acknowledgement of the settlement arrived at and recorded
hereinabove.
9. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
10. The parties are left to bear their own costs.
HIMA KOHLI, J
MAY 07, 2015
rkb
